European Court of Human Rights

THIRD SECTION

CASE OF MAKHMUDOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 22983/10 and 9 others - see list appended)

JUDGMENT
(Revision)

STRASBOURG

16 June 2020

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Makhmudova and Others v. Russia (request for revision of the judgment of 12 March 2019),

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

          Georgios A. Serghides, President,
          Dmitry Dedov,
          Gilberto Felici, judges,
and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 12 March 2019,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The case originated in ten applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) listed in Appendix II.

2.  In a judgment delivered on 12 March 2019, the Court found substantive and procedural violations of Article 2 of the Convention, a violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention, as well as a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention, and in conjunction with Article 3 of the Convention in several cases. It also decided that there was no separate issue under Article 13 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 5 of the Convention in several cases.

3.  In the above-mentioned judgment, the Court decided to award the applicants compensation for damage in the amounts set out in the table appended to that judgment. In particular, as regards compensation for pecuniary damage, it decided to award the following amounts to the applicants in application no. 73948/11, plus any tax that might be chargeable to them on those amounts: 6,000 euros (EUR) to the first applicant; EUR 7,000 each to the second and third applicants; EUR 3,000 each to the fourth and fifth applicants; EUR 9,000 to the sixth applicant; and EUR 10,000 to the seventh applicant. As regards compensation for non‑pecuniary damage, it awarded the following amounts to the applicants, plus any tax that might be chargeable to them on those amounts: EUR 80,000 to the first, second, third, fourth and fifth applicants jointly; and EUR 80,000 to the sixth and seventh applicants jointly. As regards costs and expenses, the Court awarded EUR 2,000, plus any tax that might be chargeable to the applicants on that amount. The award in respect of costs and expenses was to be paid into the representatives’ bank accounts, as indicated by the applicants. The Court dismissed the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.

4.  On 1 October 2019 the Government informed the Court that they had learned from the seventh applicant, Ms Ayna Elderkhanova, that the sixth applicant in application no. 73948/11 (her husband, Mr Sultan Elderkhanov) had died on 1 February 2013. They accordingly requested revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court.

5.  On 10 December 2019 the Court considered the request for revision and decided to give the applicants in application no. 73948/11 an opportunity to submit any written comments by 31 January 2020. Those comments were received by the Court on 31 January 2020.

THE LAW

REQUEST FOR REVISION

6.  The Government requested revision of the judgment of 12 March 2019, a judgment which they had been unable to execute because the sixth applicant in application no. 73948/11 (Mr Sultan Elderkhanov) had died before the judgment had been adopted. They noted that the applicants had failed to comply with their obligation to inform the Court of the sixth applicant’s death, and that none of his next of kin had expressed a wish to pursue the application in his stead. The Government claimed that no award should be made in respect of him, and that the sums which had initially been awarded to him should not be transferred to his next of kin.

7.  The applicants stated that Mr Elderkhanov’s death had not had a decisive influence on the outcome of the proceedings before the Court, and that his widow (the seventh applicant, Ms Ayna Elderkhanova) was his legally recognised heir and entitled to receive the sums which had been awarded to him.

8.  The Court accepts the Government’s argument that Mr Elderkhanov’s death had a decisive influence on the outcome of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court, namely the allocation of sums under Article 41 of the Convention.

9.  The Court accordingly decides that the judgment of 12 March 2019 should be revised pursuant to Rule 80 of the Rules of Court, the relevant parts of which provide:

“A party may, in the event of the discovery of a fact which might by its nature have a decisive influence and which, when a judgment was delivered, was unknown to the Court and could not reasonably have been known to that party, request the Court ... to revise that judgment.”

10.  Having regard to the parties’ submissions, the Court revises the judgment in relation to the part concerning the just satisfaction award to the applicants in application no. 73948/11. The revised part of the judgment in the form of a table is set out in the Appendix I.

11.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1.      Decides to revise its judgment of 12 March 2019 in so far as it concerns the application of Article 41 of the Convention to the claims of the applicants in application no. 73948/11;

2.      Holds accordingly,

(a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants in application no. 73948/11, within three months, the amounts indicated in Appendix I, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. The award in respect of costs and expenses is to be paid into the representatives’ bank accounts as indicated by the applicants;

(b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 16 June 2020, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Olga Chernishova                                                            Georgios A. Serghides
Deputy Registrar                                                                       President

APPENDIX I

APPENDIX II

1.         22983/10         Makhmudova and Others v. Russia

2.         52064/11         Islamova and Tsamarayeva v. Russia

3.         52173/11         Nauzova and Others v. Russia

4.         69462/11         Mukayevy v. Russia

5.         73948/11         Chalayev and Others v. Russia

6.         7214/12           Satuyev and Others v. Russia

7.         46621/12         Abubakarova and Others v. Russia

8.         66877/12         Magomadova v. Russia

9.         71672/12         Dutayeva v. Russia

10.       23115/13         Abdulkhalimova and Others v. Russia